• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Kills/Deaths

In Bad Company 2/Black Ops the K/D and ratio is a huge part in how I play - and judging by how others play I'd say it's the same for them - or more so. I often find myself hanging back and trying not to die even if it means losing objectives so that I have a higher K/D :D It would also explain the massive numbers of snipers that hang back out of the fight and snipe even when them doing so has almost no impact on the battle - what's the point of picking off a few enemy soldiers if they have unlimited tickets? Most don't seem to care about whether the team wins or not so long as they have a good KDR and unlock pretty new stuff. The KDR isn't about knowing how well you're doing, it's about showing off.

In RO:OST not nearly so much since there's no global stats and only a generic score, I usually try to help the team achieve victory rather than personal score like BC2/BO.

I hope HoS keeps things realistic and motivates people to play with teamwork in mind rather than personal gratification.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
My main point again is that a pure K/D ratio as a score doesn't give any valid information of how well someone plays in a game with re-spawns. Killing more than you get killed is important, but when there is a constant stream of enemies, there needs to be a quantitative amount added to the equation.

Nonsense.

Just because people are respawning and time has to be spent doing so doesn't mean a kill ratio tells us nothing about how a player is performing. When you consider that every other player has to adhere to the same process, you can easily see who is pulling their weight and who isn't.

If anything, a game mode without respawns would suffer more from having a traditional kill/death ratio, because ENTIRE ROUNDS could be spent without making any kills. And players could often be forced to wait it out for a variety of reasons completely independent of their own abilities (teamkills, stray rounds/grenades, accidental suicides, etc).

If you want kills/hour save it for Countdown. Or some other mode that doesn't give players the opportunity to make a consistent ratio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schreq
Upvote 0
<In yet another K/D thread> my thoughts...

Keep the stock scoreboard simple and effective. Use a format that encourages players to play the game TW invisions. At the same time, provide access to a real time data stream (or delayed) that server operators can use to hash out a miriad of stats on their websites concerning the players on their servers.

Steam will already be handling universal awards and scoring. Bragging rights over other details can be coded to the server operators preference and posted on their website. If the server operator wants fans of K/D ratios, he'll have the K/D scores on his website and K/D interested players on his server, etc. etc.

Win/win.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I would also like to add that Kills are teamwork, if your not killing anyone or saving the guy next to you your not helping out your team very much

I would argue that kills are a product of teamwork - on their own do not necessarily equal teamwork. You can be a 1337 sniper and kill 50 guys in a match but it doesn't mean anything if you didn't help your team to take the objectives.

* * * * * *

There is very little incentive to go it alone or sit back if there is no display of kills and deaths, the main focus of the game is for your team to win. However, the more players there are the more the KD/Ratio starts to affect the level of teamwork.

Here's a situation - you are on a team of 16 players vs 16 players and losing. Despite your personal efforts you can't push past the enemy. Ok so imagine that with and without kill/death stats. I can tell you that every time that's happened to me with stats I've gone solo to get as many kills as I can and left the team to wallow in defeat - I'd rather end the game with a loss but a high KDR than a loss with simply a high death count. As a matter of fact I did that this morning in BC2, we were losing so I thought "oh bugger it" and got a sniper rifle and sat back to pick off the enemy > instant high KDR. And you do it without thinking a lot of the time, your KDR is almost like a currency, the more you push to help your team the more you pay with KDR because attacking usually results in far greater deaths than kills, as such you hit the "not worth it" point and then the teamwork suffers.

Edit: Obviously there will be a difference between public and private servers but I think most players care more about themselves than a bunch of randoms they've never heard of before.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Nonsense.

Just because people are respawning and time has to be spent doing so doesn't mean a kill ratio tells us nothing about how a player is performing. When you consider that every other player has to adhere to the same process, you can easily see who is pulling their weight and who isn't.

If anything, a game mode without respawns would suffer more from having a traditional kill/death ratio, because ENTIRE ROUNDS could be spent without making any kills. And players could often be forced to wait it out for a variety of reasons completely independent of their own abilities (teamkills, stray rounds/grenades, accidental suicides, etc).

If you want kills/hour save it for Countdown. Or some other mode that doesn't give players the opportunity to make a consistent ratio.

Its exactly single life game types where a K/D ratio has proven itself. In a game like counterstrike a Kill/Death ratio shows everything. Exactly because the quantitative measurement is not really important there. You only have one life to begin with so in that sense the person with the Highest K/D ratio is likely the same person with the highest K/H ratio.

Again I'm not implying a K/D ratio doesn't say anything about a player I'm saying that it only implies how good a player is at staying alive. And that info isn't enough to determine something like a players skill. If you would call K/D a qualitative measurement you would need additional information telling the quantitative information. If people respawn within a short period of time then its important to make a vast quantity of kills next to not wasting the reinforcements.

It is very easy to manipulate a pure K/D ratio so that you get a high ratio without doing anything. And in my opinion that is detrimental for game play. And that is why beside the pure ratio in my opinion you need to continue to display the quantitative measurement for instance within the ratio. So in an easy and accessible way, people can actually see how someone is performing both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Anyway we all know we disagree with each other, but lets quit this discussion as we're going around in circles for the last few posts.


[QUOTE=M
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I'd rather just have a teamwork score, or even better have no score at all. The only score you get is TeamA won and TeamB lost at the end of the round. Getting "kills" wasn't on the minds of soldiers fighting for their countries and lives and it shouldn't be on the minds of those recreating those experiences.

The issue here is that a lot of people want to see how they are doing. With the aim for gaining more players TWI cannot afford to remove the scoreboard. I do however hope that there will be server options to disable the scoreboard or only show the scores when you're dead or for instance when the round is over.

The thing is kills are important for a teams success so if you make a scoreboard about how good someone is helping his team you need to take kills into the equation. Its just hard if not impossible to gain a good correlation between the importance of killing versus say capping, which is why I think its better to keep them separate (as long as the beta shows that it got no negative effects on game play of course).
 
Upvote 0
Zets, a K/D is telling enough, I don't understand your concerns. Statistically a 15:2 (7.5) KD is of course better than 44:30 (1.47). But isn't it common sense that the guy with the 44 Kills actually played better and had more influence on the teams performance than the guy with the better K/D but only 15 kills?

Same question goes to LJFHutch. Don't tell me the sniping behavior in bc2 you mentioned, gets you more kills as if you run around. Maybe a better K/D because you die less often but overall you will get more kills if you run around. Well, I guess you play on hardcore or generally suck ;)

To all the people who fear showing Kills and Deaths will change the way how people play: People play totally slow already. Camping on some spot where they are hardly making any or a lot of kills. Of course they also don't die so often at those spots but what is the point? Seems they aren't encouraged to help the team even though RO tries to do that, right? I can observe that behavior on any server in RO.
With kills and deaths on the scoreboard, it should still be sorted by Score. If you want to be the first on the scoreboard, you have to do 'teamplay' (yeah capping is so much teamplay :rolleyes:). If you camp to get a good k/d, you will most likely get less kills than a rambo being in or on the enemys side of a capzone. Not to talk about points. Since points will rank you up, thats what people want to achieve anyway.

Edit: About the match screens you posted, zetsu: Miller played a lot better than you. A blind man should see that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Same question goes to LJFHutch. Don't tell me the sniping behavior in bc2 you mentioned, gets you more kills as if you run around. Maybe a better K/D because you die less often but overall you will get more kills if you run around. Well, I guess you play on hardcore or generally suck ;)

If you're losing it doesn't really matter how good you are you're going to take a whole lot of deaths trying to cap a flag almost on your own, and yeah that was HC. Usually you don't get a good KD unless you snipe, even back in the early days of BC2 where I'd take 1st place on the scoreboard more often than not, I usually didn't get a K/D above 2:1 while the snipers usually got 5:1 easily (that wasn't HC). Of course not everyone can get an average KD but it didn't stop people from staying back out of the fight and trying it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
If you're losing it doesn't really matter how good you are you're going to take a whole lot of deaths trying to cap a flag almost on your own, and yeah that was HC. Usually you don't get a good KD unless you snipe, even back in the early days of BC2 where I'd take 1st place on the scoreboard more often than not, I usually didn't get a K/D above 2:1 while the snipers usually got 5:1 easily (that wasn't HC). Of course not everyone can get an average KD but it didn't stop people from staying back out of the fight and trying it.
Yeah but that's the attitude of the people. Who says they wouldn't do the same if there wouldn't be K/D on the scoreboard? It's just that sniping is so famous and awesome, that a lot of people like to sit miles away being an awesome sniper :)
 
Upvote 0
I agree with Floyd.

<In yet another K/D thread> my thoughts...

Keep the stock scoreboard simple and effective. Use a format that encourages players to play the game TW invisions. At the same time, provide access to a real time data stream (or delayed) that server operators can use to hash out a miriad of stats on their websites concerning the players on their servers.

Steam will already be handling universal awards and scoring. Bragging rights over other details can be coded to the server operators preference and posted on their website. If the server operator wants fans of K/D ratios, he'll have the K/D scores on his website and K/D interested players on his server, etc. etc.

Win/win.
 
Upvote 0